An Innovative Online Diagnostic Tool for a Distributed Spatial Coordinate Measuring System

  • Fiorenzo Franceschini
  • Maurizio Galetto
  • Domenico Maisano
  • Luca Mastrogiacomo


There is currently an increasing trend for accurate measurements of large-scale lengths; in particular, 3D coordinate metrology at length scales of 5 m to 60 m has become a routine requirement in industries such as aircraft and ship construction. This chapter focuses on the Mobile Spatial coordinate Measuring System (MScMS), a new system developed at the Industrial Metrology and Quality Engineering Laboratory of DISPEA of the Politecnico di Torino. Based on a distributed sensor network structure, MScMS is designed to perform simple and rapid indoor dimensional measurements of large-size objects. Using radiofrequency (RF) and ultrasound (US) signals, the system makes it possible to localize-in terms of spatial coordinates-the points “touched” by a wireless mobile probe. To protect the system from potential causes of error, such as US signal diffraction and reflection, external uncontrolled US sources (key jingling, neon blinking, etc.) or unacceptable software solutions, MScMS implements some statistical tests in order to perform online diagnostics. One of these tests is analyzed in depth in this chapter: the “energy model-based diagnostics test.” Although it is specifically developed for the MScMS


Wireless Sensor Network Acceptance Interval Coordinate Measuring Machine Reference Node Acceptance Limit 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Akcan. H., Kriakov, V., Brönnimann H., Delis A.: GPS-free node localization in mobile wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of MobiDE’06, Chicago, IL, USA, 25 June (2006)Google Scholar
  2. Bosch, J.A.: Coordinate Measuring Machines and Systems. Marcel Dekker, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  3. Cauchick-Miguel, P., King, T., Davis, J.: CMM verification: a survey. Measurement 17(1), 1–16 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen, M., Cheng, F., Gudavalli, R.: Precision and accuracy in an indoor localization system (Technical Report CS294-1/2). University of California, Berkeley, CA (2003)Google Scholar
  5. Feng, C.X.J., Saal, A.L., Salsbury, J.G., Ness, A.R., Lin, G.C.S.: Design and analysis of experiments in CMM measurement uncertainty study. Precis. Eng. 31(2), 94–101 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Franceschini, F., Galetto, M.: A taxonomy of model-based redundancy methods for CMM on-line performance verification. Int. J. Technol. Manage. 37(1–2), 104–124 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Franceschini, F., Galetto, M., Maisano, D.: Management by Measurement-Designing Key Indicators and Performance Measurement Systems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  8. Franceschini, F., Galetto, M., Maisano, D., Mastrogiacomo, L.: A review of localization algorithms for distributed wireless sensor networks in manufacturing. Int. J. Computer Integr. Manuf. (in press) (2008a). doi:10.1080/09511920601182217Google Scholar
  9. Franceschini, F., Galetto, M., Maisano, D., Mastrogiacomo, L.: Mobile Spatial coordinate Measuring System (MScMS)-introduction to the system. Int. J. Prod. Res. (in press) (2008b). doi:10.1080/00207540701881852Google Scholar
  10. Gertler. J.J.: Fault Detection and Diagnosis in Engineering Systems. Marcel Dekker, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  11. GUM: Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva (2004)Google Scholar
  12. Gustafsson, F., Gunnarsson, F.: Positioning using time difference of arrival measurements. Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Acoustics. Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP 2003), Hong Kong 6, 553–556 (2003)Google Scholar
  13. Hansen, H.N., De Chiffre, L.: An industrial comparison of coordinate measuring machines in Scandinavia with focus on uncertainty statements. Precis. Eng. 23(3), 185–195 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hofmann-Wellenhof, B., Lichtenegger, H., Collins, J.: GPS. Theory and Practice. Springer, Wien (2001)Google Scholar
  15. ISO: 10360, part 2: Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS)-acceptance and reverification tests for coordinate measuring machines (CMM). International Organization for Standardization, Geneva (2001)Google Scholar
  16. ISO/TS: 15530-6 (Working Draft): Geometrical product specifications (GPS)-coordinate measuring machines (CMM): techniques for determining the uncertainty of measurements. Part 6: Uncertainty assessment using uncalibrated workpieces. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva (2000)Google Scholar
  17. Lee, M.C., Ferreira, P.M.: Auto-triangulation and auto-trilateration. Part 1. Fundamentals. Precis. Eng. 26(3), 237–249 (2002a)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. Lee M.C., Ferreira P.M.: Auto-triangulation and auto-trilateration-Part 2: Three-dimensional experimental verification. Precis. Eng. 26(3). 250–262 (2002b)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. Metris: Webpage.
    volume_tracking__positioning/ (2008)Google Scholar
  20. Metronor: Webpage. (2008)Google Scholar
  21. MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Lab: Cricket v2 User Manual. http://cricket. (2004)Google Scholar
  22. Montgomery, D.C.: Introduction to Statistical Process Control. Wiley, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  23. Moore D., Leonard J., Rus D., Teller S.S.: Robust distributed network localization with noisy range measurements. Proceedings of SenSys 2004, Baltimore, MD, pp. 50–61, 3-5 Nov. (2004)Google Scholar
  24. Phillips. S.D., Sawyer, D., Borchardt, B., Ward, D., Beutel. D.E.: A novel artifact for testing large coordinate measuring machines. Precis. Eng. 25(1), 29–34 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Piratelli-Filho, A., Di Giacomo, B.: CMM uncertainty analysis with factorial design. Prec. Eng. 27(3). 283–288 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Reznik, L.K., Solopchenko, G.N.: Use of a-priori information on functional relations between measured quantities for improving accuracy of measurement. Measurement 3(3), 98–106 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rooks, B.: A vision of the future at TEAM. Sensor Rev. 24(2), 137–143 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sandwith, S., Predmore, R.: Real-time 5-micron uncertainty with laser tracking interferometer systems using weighted trilateration. Proc. 2001 Boeing Large Scale Metrology Seminar, St. Louis, MO, 13-14 Feb. (2001)Google Scholar
  29. Savio, E., Hansen, H.N., De Chiffre, L.: Approaches to the calibration of freeform artefacts on coordinate measuring machines. Ann. CIRP 51/1, San Sebastian, Spain, pp. 433–436 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Savvides, A., Han, C., Strivastava, M.B.: Dynamic fine-grained localization in ad hoc networks of sensors. Proc. ACM/IEEE 7th Annu. Int. Conf. on Mobile Computing and Networking (Mobi-Com’01), pp. 166–179, July (2001)Google Scholar
  31. VIM: International Vocabulary of Basic and General Terms in Metrology. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva (2004)Google Scholar
  32. Welch, G., Bishop, G., Vicci, L., Bramback, S., Keller, K.: High-performance wide-area optical tracking. The HiBall Tracking System. Presence Teleoper. Virtual Env. 10(1), 1–21 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fiorenzo Franceschini
    • 1
  • Maurizio Galetto
    • 1
  • Domenico Maisano
    • 1
  • Luca Mastrogiacomo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Production Systems and Business Economics (DISPEA)Politecnico di TorinoTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations